Registered user login:

An abuse of state power

Published 08 October 2007

The New Statesman responds to the charging of a Foreign Office official, said to follow the publication of a number of articles in the NS, Observer and by Policy Exchange

On Sept 27, Derek Pasquill, an official at the Foreign Office, was charged with six counts under the Official Secrets Act. He is due to appear in court on October 11. This case is said to follow the publication in the New Statesman, the Observer and in a pamphlet by the Policy Exchange think tank of a series of articles highlighting damaging and dangerous government policy. These included an expose of British acquiescence in the secret and illegal “rendition” (Rendition: the cover up) by the United States of terrorist suspects, and various revelations about government policy towards radical Islam.

The articles won awards for the NS; but more importantly, they gave rise to a number of questions in parliament, led to cross-party support and significant shifts in government policy.

Indeed, Gordon Brown has already gone some way to distancing himself from the excesses of the past. Ministers have changed their approach to engagement with the Muslim community, ending their reliance on the Muslim Council of Britain. Indeed, ministers have acknowledged the role of the NS in highlighting these issues.

The NS readily accepts that there are some circumstances where official secrecy is necessary to protect national security. However, the idea of charging Mr Pasquill under the OS Act is an abuse of state power, designed merely to spare ministerial embarrassment. The public interest is best served by promoting this kind of debate rather than by seeking to criminalise individuals. We, and others, will pursue this with vigour.

John Kampfner
Editor, New Statesman


Here are some links to some more of the articles:

A useful summary of the story so far can be found at Index on Censorship: Britain: secrets and sources

The New Statesman exclusive about Foreign Office discussions with the Muslim Brotherhood: Talking to terrorists

Martin Bright's article in the Observer from August 2005: Leak shows Blair told of Iraq war terror link

Bright's Policy Exchange pamphlet on the government's policy of appeasement with radical Islam When progressives treat with reactionaries

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

3 comments from readers

Carl Jones
09 October 2007 at 18:59

I was posting about "rendition and torture on the BBC Today message boards 18 months before the MSM.

The "fact" that nearly all European states were actively involved in this illegal neocon policy of rendition and torture. Implies they were behind the US/UK illegal invasion of Iraq, while their public face told another story.

Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo were nasty little decoys for the MSM to follow, Members of the public were "kidnapped" off the streets of European cities. An Italian judge is still seeking the extradition of some 20 odd CIA officers. MI6 was also kidnapping in Athens...both incidents were covered by the "alternative internet media"....David Rose eat your heart out!

So here I am, I don`t believe the NWO War on Terror construct. Of course, there are Muslims who are working for the SIS, but with all this rendition and so little to show for it. One must ask the question, "what are they doing with the kidnapped"? I`d suggest a little re-programming, to be activated at a later date.

The Dark Forces also tried to bring a CIA 747 down on London. The plane was flying from Ramstein to LHR, as they approached London, the 747 had serious engine power issues. The crew were insistant that they land at LHR, they passed Stansted, Luton, LHR, Farnbrough and Gatwick. At one point the crew doubted their ability to remain in the air. As you can see, the list of airports above indictes their flight path. They then do a loop over Kent heading towards Bromley and then onto Central London...remember, this CIA 747 was only just kept in the air and it was flying over Central London. It finally lands at LHR. The plane is checked over for reasons why all four engines had fluctuating low power output...you can read the full report, its on the net. They could find nothing wrong with the plane, not a single fault.

Question were asked in the House, no real answers were given. We don`t know what the plane was carrying.

So now I`ll explain how this happened. In the 70`s, the US military in conjunction with Boeing designed all the flight controls with the ability to be overidden from a ground station, or another plane with the right kit. This was so say done due to all the plane hijaking at the time. It looks like the above incident was called off. Did they lose their bottle, did the pilots perform beyond what was expected? Unlike 9/11 where the flight boxes were recovered, but weren`t revealed to the media/public. In the UK, no such coverup could happen....or should I say, it would be very hard to do.

Remote control of US manufactured passenger planes would go some way to explaining 9/11. The fact is, someone wanted to crash a CIA 747 on London....they would no doubt blame it on escaped Muslims who were on the CIA 747.

Of course, the Dark Forces (David Rose) have little alternative, but to try and stem the leaks. If rendition were exposed and fully investigated, a lot of people in the employ of the NWO would be in prison....like Tony Blair the war criminal...where is he?

Carl Jones
09 October 2007 at 20:08

I suspect the Dark Forces have already attempted to remove the above comment...nothing changes.

amanfromMars
10 October 2007 at 12:26

Dear Mr Editor, the New Statesman,

You may need to be more than simply vigourous as the comments on this story .... http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/10/10/gover...

.... paint an all too plausible, disturbed picture.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Read More

Vote!

Should the third runway at Heathrow go ahead?